In a memo dated October 27, 2025, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced that the Pentagon was requesting Judge Advocate General (JAG) lawyers to volunteer to assist the federal government with its backlog of immigration cases. It also hinted that if not enough attorneys responded, the Department of Defense (DOD) would volunteer them itself.
The call for 48 more temporary immigration judges (TIJs) follows in the footsteps of the 600 already culled from the military’s ranks in early October to aid the Department of Justice (DOJ) as Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys. Hegseth’s order requests attorneys with experience in immigration law and immigration courts, which may be difficult to find within the military services. The DOD claims the additional TIJs are necessary to meet the White House’s immigration enforcement policies.
Detractors have raised red flags over the proposed use of military attorneys with no experience as immigration lawyers to rule on civilian law cases as TIJs, which is only possible due to the DOJ stripping away most of the requirements in August 2025. While the new TIJs are expected to be sent to locations along the border between the U.S. and Mexico, little is known about their exact roles and expectations or how to allay concerns about their lack of experience and expertise.
I’m Sorry, How Many Cases Are Pending?
While the principles of law are essentially the same, civilian and military courts differ in their adjudication processes. Military justice for active-duty members of the armed forces is its own legal creature, and administrative law follows suit. Military lawyers, also known as Judge Advocates, have requirements to meet before becoming service members. They must be graduates of an ABA-accredited law school, pass a bar exam, and sign up for at least a four-year active duty commitment, which is usually followed by a four-year inactive duty term, during which they can be recalled as needed. This is standard policy whether they choose the Marine Corps, the Air Force, or any of the other U.S. Military branches.
Battling illegal immigration has been a main focus of President Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress. With over 3.8 million immigration cases in the backlog, adding additional immigration judges in recent years has seemed like a reasonable idea. President Joseph Biden added 340 immigration judges during his term, but the first several months of President Trump’s second term saw well over 100 permanent immigration judges being either fired, laid off, or resigning in protest, allegedly due to the DOJ instructing them on which decisions to make.
With the intent to greatly increase the rate of deportations, the Pentagon and the DOJ have worked together to create a supply of temporary judges. The previous legal guidelines that were steamrolled to make the new TIJ approval process possible have some wondering if this is truly the best way to address the issue.
Not Like Applying for a Position in a Mall Food Court
Regulations for becoming a TIJ were established under the Immigration and Nationality Act and amended under the Homeland Security Act of 2002. TIJs are intended to be used in support of permanent immigration judges when needed. They’re hired for a six-month term, which is renewable. They were also required to have significant experience in immigration law, with at least one of the following backgrounds:
- Served at least 10 years as a DOJ immigration attorney
- Served as an administrative judge in another office in the executive branch
- Served as either an immigration judge or an appellate immigration judge
In addition, permanent immigration judges are required to undergo a highly specialized training program. This is to ensure they understand all aspects of the position.
A rule change made by the Executive Office for Immigration Review in the DOJ, instituted on August 28, 2025, removed these requirements. A call for 600 JAG attorneys to fill TIJ positions soon followed. The response rate hasn’t been shared, but Hegseth’s memo indicated that military attorneys may find themselves “volunteered” if the quota isn’t met willingly.
Those opposing the use of JAG lawyers as TIJ cite the move as a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the appointment of military officials to adjudicate civilian cases or engage in law enforcement activities. This is a familiar refrain that has resulted in a multitude of pending court cases regarding the Trump administration’s use of the National Guard as a federal police force in U.S. cities. Legal opposition to the deployment of JAG attorneys is possible.
Related Resources
- Concern From Many Judges as Rhetoric Escalates and Threats Keep Increasing (FindLaw’s Practice of Law)
- Military Administrative Issues (FindLaw’s Military Law)
- How To Become a Judge: Taking Steps Toward the Black Robe (FindLaw’s Practice of Law)
